Popular Content

Let me maake this really simple for everyone to understand.
Iran is divided into 3 political power forces.
The neutrals, they are few and often don't get attention.
The "Seculars" These are your Rafsanjanis, Rohanis, Zarifs
The Hezbollahis, Wf, Mesbah yazdis, khatamis (not the president), Raisis
From the beginning of the revolution it was very clear for Imam Khomeini who these were, but like history shows, sometimes people have to witness things themselves.
When Iran contra happened, they didn't tell Imam Khomeini. It was not until their plane landed that Imam Khomeini was notified and he gave the order that negotiation with them is not allowed.
When they landed they came with a cake and a gun, and on the cake there was an image of a "key" which is a political sign of opening for negotiation.
Notice how the Roohani camp also show them holding cardboard keys. These are the same gang that betrayed Imam Khomeini then, and betray Ayatollah Khamenei now(nuclear issue among other things)
So when people say "Iran" they need to first understand what Iran is. It's like someone saying Iraq killed kurds and Iranians. No, Saddam and his followers did, Iraq didn't. So everything Iranian officials did and still do must not be labled as something in agreement with Hezbollah/WF/revolution, just like how not everything abu bakr and omar did should be regarded as something the prophet approved of or in agreement with Islam, or what saddam did should be regarded as what iraqis agreed with.

If you are truthful then Congrats, but always rememeber this, we have a saying in farsi, im sure it exists in other forms in other languages too:
It's important to live in allegiance with Ali, but it's far more important to die in allegiance with Ali!
The worst thing one can do in this life, is breaking bayah. The thing that destroyed many men throughout history was that they broke their bayah with the Prophet and his Family.

Asaalaalaikum,
Im glad to say that im now a SHIA! Alhamdulillah!
Why did I take this decision? Because I've been reading and contemplating and reflecting about Islam and my beliefs. One thing I have especially been thinking about is Islamic history. I look at the lives of the sahaba and I realize there are many virtues in their lives, however the sahaba in general are clearly not healthy examples to follow and I believe that the Ahlulbayt is the clearest and PUREST path to the true sunnah of Rasoolullah (saw)! This is because although the sahaba such as Umar ibn al Khattab and Abu Bakr did many good things and made genuine efforts towards Islam, it is clear that they are not the best examples for me to follow. For example, Abu Bakr was the first person to do Takfir as he declared war on those not willing to pay zakat, Its clear that the sahaba have categories: I believe that many sahaba had flaws in their character but were still overall good people as they strived for Islam with everything they had. However there are some sahabas that are just very bad in character. For example Khalid Ibn al Walid was the commander of the muslim army for many years and many sunnies glorify him because of his military accomplishments, but clearly he had no morals. He killed many innocent people and even killed a muslim man and raped his wife. DISGUSTING! I cant follow someone like that! I think that If someone takes Khalid Ibn AL Walid as a role model they will end up joining ISIS, Al Qaeda or the Taliban. Another example of a despicable sahaba is Muawiya which I'm sure I don't need to talk about.
ON THE FLIP SIDE..... The Ahlulbayt are cleary of a higher status,and the division of the ummah from the start is very clear. Now I'm a follower of Ali (as), Hassan (as), Hussain(as), Zain UL abadeen (as) and Zayd ibn Ali (as)!!!! By following these individuals I truly believe that I will be a follower of MUHAMMAD RASOOLULALH (saw). However one may ask the question, why do I need to be shia to love the ahlulbayt?? My answer is that yes, sunnies do also love the ahlulbayt, but the problem of sunnism is that they dont condemn sahabas who committed oppression! I will never be a supporter of ANY tyrant and oppressor!
the following hadith payed a big part in me becoming Shia:
"The Messenger of God sent Khalid b. al-Walid to the people of the Yemen inviting them to Islam, and I was among those who went with him. He persisted in the matter for six months, but they did not respond, so the Messenger of God sent 'Ali b. Abi Talib and ordered him that Khalid and those who were with him should return, but if any of them would like to follow him he should allow them. Al-Bara' said, "I was one who followed 'Ali, and as we reached the borders of the Yemen the people got the news. They gathered around him and 'Ali led us in the morning prayer. When he had finished [the prayer], he lined us up in one row. Then he moved before us, praised and extolled God, then read to them the letter of the Messenger of God. All of Hamdan embraced Islam in one day, and he wrote to the Messenger of God about it. When the Prophet read 'Ali's letter he fell down, prostrating himself to God. Then he sat up and said, 'Peace be upon Hamdan, Peace be upon Hamdan' [After the conversion of Hamdan] )he people of the Yemen followed in succession with their acceptance of Islam" - narrated by Tabari.
alhamdulillah! Its time to take a stand, to take my own path! The iranan author Ali Shariati says: "My father chose my name, my ancestors chose my last name, thats enough. I myself choose my way!". I was born a hanafi sunni but now im a Shia. Furthermore, the Quran says:
"(53:38) No soul shall bear the burden on another" (Wa La tazitru waaziratu wizra ukhra).

Israel is trying to bait Iran to use Hezb in Lebanon to attack them so that they can have that same excuse and mantra of having to invade lebanon again like they did in 2006 when two of their soldiers were trespassing and captured in Lebanon and what followed was a full scale war.

I think a more apt question should be "Which one has more people following their guidance?"
We all know about what the Ahle Bayt (AS) have taught as to what to avoid and what to engage in. We also know about what the Shaytan tries to decieve us with regarding what to do and what to avoid.
Which one has a greater proportionate following?
Do we follow in the footsteps of the Ahle Bayt (AS) or do we give in to the temptations of the Shaitan?

So let me get this straight. You make a tradeoff with the enemy.........You have something of theirs, they want it back, so you take something from them. What's the problem?
And just a tip, when looking into a controversial affair that is between muslims and non muslims, the least one can do is look into the case from both views. All i see here is reports and articles from nytimes etc.

Sorry I drifted... Israel is sending in all their slaves to fight their wars for them. But you dont even recognize that zionists control the world... I remember our early debates where you would just make fun of me because I would mention freemasons and illuminati.. I call them zionists, but they exist and they control every politician and business man in the west. And they work directly to bringing the dajjal's rule on earth(NWO). and so far they have done a pretty damn good job with so many shias here completely blind to their deception.

I cannot understand how you do not see that every action the USA does is actually done for Israel. How you fail to recognize that the people pulling the strings are all zionists. You think Trump makes decisions? He follows scripts given to him. Who writes the scripts? Why is USA in Syria? Why... is USA... in Syria? Why are they not in Uganda, Nigeria, Philippines... all have dictators. Nigerian boko haram kidnapped a whole school,, killing thousands.. did we see the USA send one commando to Nigeria? So why Syria? Have you not noticed everything the USA has done in the past 50 years is for the security and defense of Israel? Why do they hate Iran? What has Iran done to the USA? Name one attack from Iran to the USA? The USA is against Iran simply because Iran is against Israel. If the Israeli loving shah was still in power the USA would have no problem with Iran. Honestly me having to explain this to you feels to me like I have to talk to you like a small kid. These things are beyond obvious.
What does Israel have to lose???
Do you think Israel doesnt know there will be a future war with Hizbullah and Iran? In the past decades Israel would just fly over, bomb us.. and smile.. and there was not a damn thing we can do about it.. They bombed Lebanese bridges, power plants, runways... every 2 or 3 years they would fly over, bomb a power plant, and just go... any UN resolutions? any International condemnation? none... we couldnt do anything. No air defense, no political leverage. Until today we suffer from, daily power cuts. But one thing Israel cannot do is attack us on land. in 2006 1 Hizbullah soldier alone took out 17 merkava tanks. He is a martyr now. Sounds fake yea, well what do you think we mean by there were miracles in the 2006 war. The Israelis pounded us with airstrikes for 1 month and then decided to do a land offensive. They couldn't pass an inch, suffered heavy losses and stopped the war. Now. if you go back just before the Syrian war, USA and Israel were trying to pressure Russia into not selling S-300s to Iran.. Russia held off at first and then decided to give Iran the S-300s... not a year later this mess started .Could it not be that Zionists realized the s-300s could be transferred from Iran to Hizbullah? Through where? the only land bridge is Syria... Would that not explain every time the terrorists suffered a loss in Syria, like madmen Israelis would bomb convoys and military caches in Syria? Do you not see how they are foaming at the mouths. The have enslaved the Saudis to send Isis and it failed. Now they are thinking of a plan B. This is plan B.
Did you not hear Sheikh Bhajat and AYt Khamanei say that Israel will be gone in the next decade? Do you not think we are in the time of the reappearance? How long do you think it is? How long do you think you can live in a world where a school teacher gets sued for a calling a boy "him". lol That is my own example. How long bro do you think it is before his reappearance?

Wa alaikum as salam,
Brother you raised very valid question and it proves that you are learning things rather having blind faith in anything. Learning is part and parcel of life and we must continue our journey of getting educated until we reach in grave.
There are very certain reasons because of which Imam Ali (as) never took part in any war during the first three calpihs and I can summarize as below-
1. First three caliphs were not legitimate one and they had usurped the rights of AhleBait (as) and for further reading on the subject you can read Sermon in Nahjul Balgha especially Khutba e Shiqshiqya and its commentary.
2. Fighting under army of any of these 3 caliphs would have means that Imam Ali (as) accepted them as his leader and caliph. He had been offered role of commander of muslim army several times but he refused to take any positions.
3. Islam believes in spreading message of love and compassion and convert people's heart rather forcing them to convert under the blade of swords..Converting people with swords will create society of hypocrites and not of Momen and Islam needs momin not munafiq. Banu Umayya clan is best example of munafiq who got converted to Islam after conquest of Makka due to threat to their life.
Some people believe that Imam Ali (as) pledged his allegiance to AbuBakr after 6 months. that is completely rubbish, he just withdrawn himself from robe of caliphate and was busy teaching people essence of Islam. He even refused to accept allegiance of muslim community after murder of Usman but accepted after much deliberations and acceptance by the community that they will obey his all commands. Talha and Zubair were first to pledge allegiance to Maula Ali (as) and first to break their Oath. Few people used to write in their historical claims that they were forced to pledge allegiance though Imam Ali (as) never forced allegiance on anyone. Ibn Umar refused to pay his allegiance and Maula Ali (as) didn't force him at the time when Talha and Zubair paid allegiance.
4.Expansionist ideology of different caliphs and muslim rulers is not teaching of Islam and hence Maula Ali (as) refused to take part in any of wars under first 3 caliphs.

I have not denied the fact that his followers were cooperating with the government, dear brother, and perhaps under his (as) own advice. I may be mistaken, but nor do I think that all his followers were impoverished, Salman (ra), Uthman ibn Hunayf (ra) and some others were working for the government in administrative capacity, plus the Imam(as) also earned his livelihood, I can't recall them at the moment, but I have read hadiths in Sunni Sihah that mention him caring for camels and tending to palm groves as late as the reign of Uthman ibn Affan, he had grown up sons who could support him, etc etc. As it is, his needs were very few, his lifestyle very frugal, so he could make do with little money.
Of course people are going to have different interpretations of history, and weigh different evidences differently; that's the reason why denominational differences exist in the first place. I admit that i don't know much about this issue, maybe someone more knowledgeable can answer your questions.
Salam.

I'm not sure what is meant by "abusing" mut'a . If a man and woman agree to be married for a day or more or less to fulfill their sexual desires, that is perfectly permissible. If a Muslim man contracts mut'a with a kitabi woman that's perfectly permissible as well. The difference between having a nikah contract and zina is like the difference between halal meat and haram meat.

The totality (jumlah) of contingent existence, that is, the universe, whether it is finite or infinite is a set, cannot itself be necessary. A totality subsists through the existence of its parts. We are essentially saying a necessary existent, that for whom existence cannot not be, has its existence contingent on its parts, an obvious absurdity. Contingent existents can be thought to fail to exist as their existence is equidistant between necessity and impossibility, with nothing in their essence demanding they exist (like a necessary existent, which we would be attempting to ascertain the existence of through such an argument) or precluding their existence all together (like an impossible existent, e.g., a square circle). It is therefore conceivable that every single thing which exists in the totality of existence, that is, the universe, could fail to exist all together since it is only contingent. Since a set subsists only through the existence of its parts we would effectively have a necessarily existent universe, which is contingent on the existence of its contingent parts, not existing, since being a totality demands the presence of parts, yet somehow at the same time existing necessarily (since there cannot be a condition where a necessary existent fails to exist). As such, the totality of existence, that is, the universe, cannot be the necessary existent thought of in this argument.
Refer to Jon McGinnis' "The Ultimate Why Question: Avicenna on Why God Is Absolutely Necessary" found in The Ultimate Why Question: Why There is Something At All Rather Than Absolutely Nothing (ed. John F. Wippel, pp. 65-83, for this matter specifically, refer to pages 72 and 73). Because of what seems to be other misconceptions of this type of argument, I recommend you read the rest of the work as well as the SEP and IEP articles on cosmological arguments to understand what exactly they are actually trying to do. This is also useful in clarifying the aims of the arguments.

How can you determine that my estimate that its 99% is right or wrong? The guy has no basis for it, he just pukes out statements like this all day. He never debates with people who can actually refute his silly statements, and the one time he did he got so embarrassed that by the end of the debate he was just not saying anything anymore.

No, if you can see his capability you will find that he can only produce waswasah. He cannot hold our hands & throw us from the prayer mat. It is we who use our own will & power in obeying his whispers.
Shaitan is not responsible for misguidance. It is we who buy the misguidance with our will & wish.
I was helping my son in the preparation of his Physics test yesterday. What I was doing was, to try to confuse him in finding the correct answer. I was trying to misguide him for knowing how certain he is in his answer. If he has studied the subject, he would select the correct answer with certainty.
Perhaps Allah (s.w.t) want to produce in us the same certainty in finding & following the truth. And that's why I see the creation of Iblis as "Lutf" of Allah (s.w.t).
Surah Al-Ankaboot, Verse 2:
أَحَسِبَ النَّاسُ أَن يُتْرَكُوا أَن يَقُولُوا آمَنَّا وَهُمْ لَا يُفْتَنُونَ
Do men think that they will be left alone on saying, We believe, and not be tried?
(English - Shakir)
Every human being possess the ability to defeat iblis. This is how weak iblis is!

@Haji 2003 Ashura cereal.
[Edit] Also called Noah's pudding. The name comes from the historical fact that Noah's ark came to rest on the 10th of Muhharam(Ashura) and it was him who made this for the first time in history using whatever left over supplies he had.
Desis make haleem on Ashura which is similar in the sense that it also has lots of different types of grains, carbohydrates etc.

I was very tempted to angry face react to this post just to be contrary, but I somehow managed to resist.
I hope nobody takes the reaction emojis too seriously. Human interaction in real life isn't a set of buttons. They are just meant to be fun and supportive of our fellow members.

I really think you dont know anything about political reality.. sorry. nothing you said is correct. ukraine was infiltrated by usa to attack russia.. it failed. crimea voted to join russia.. both cases were up to their necks in cia involvments trying their best to combat russia via puppets. I cant believe you stand with john McCain. you really have no political compass.. I know you are trying to be moral, but the problem is all your narratives are from the west, and you completely believe them. you my friend are of the deceived.

Only in cases of necessity is allowed.
Ayatollah Noori Hamedani (Trap):
It is not permissible not to have a creation background.
Question: What is the rule if a person who is married and has a child has a gender change and has a child who has to cease to be a dependent, or has his / her child taken? (Due to the fact that the father did not stop his father in the event of a theft of a child and the misuse of father and child).
In the assumption of the question, if sex change is realized, there is a difference between the jurisprudents in whether the ratio of an individual to his relatives has changed and has new rules or not.
Some maintain the previous ratio and say that he has previous sentences; some [2] attribute new sentences to him, and some say that he will be charged with things like rabbits and will not be able to have children But in the issue of enforcing the limit (such as the theft rate), it can not be watched appropriately.
The response of the great Imams to this question is as follows:
Grand Ayatollah Khamenei (his life longs):
In the premise of question, the appearance is that it does not have the decree of the father.
Hazrat Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi (his life longs):
In the assumption, the change in the rule is not created, and the relative relationship remains.
Hazrat Ayatollah Almighty Nouri Hamedani (his life longs):
The realization of gender change is not complete, definite, and not constant, and in the assumption of realization, new sex ordinances are due to it.
A few questions from Ayatollah Noori Hamedani:
Question: Is there anyone who is sexually determined to change his gender for any reason? And if it is permissible and this work is done, how is his relationship with his relatives and conscientious?
Answer: It is not permissible not to have a creation context.
Question: If a woman marries and changes sex after marriage, how is her marriage and dowry?
Answer: Marriage collapses and it is necessary to pay all the stamps.
Question: If a woman marries a man and the man gives birth to his wife, how is his marriage and his wife's dowry?
Answer: Marriage collapses, and it is all over her.
Question: If both husband and wife change sex, what if their sex change together and at the same time is their marriage order?
Answer: Assuming a question, it is unlikely that the marriage will remain the same and will be paired in the current couple, wife and wife.
A few questions from Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi:
Question: What is the ruling about sex change?
Answer: Transformation of gender and the appearance of real gender are not intrinsically contrary to shariah law but should be used with legitimate means, that is, the opinion and touch of haram in it, unless it is necessary.
Question: What if the husband and wife change at the same time at one time, what is the previous marriage order?
Answer: If true change, coupling is immediately terminated, and they can re-enter the marriage contract in a new form; But caution is to pass the time.
Question: If one of the couples is sexually transmitted, please tell me: 1. What is their marriage order? 2. What is the decree of the wife?
Answer: If the change of sex is real and not figuratively, their marriage will be void, but the mahr of the previous time remains in force.
PS:
[1]. Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi his life longs
[2]. The great revelations of Khamenei and Nouri Hamedani their life longs
https://article.tebyan.net/290181/برخی-احکام-تغییر-جنسیت
you can contact in english by below link
http://www.shahryarcohanzad.com/Medical-Contact.html

I don't see the problem. Our religion recommends this practice, Islam does not preach that sex is evil and that sexual abstinence is virtuous like Christianity does. Mut'a is not a disliked act, it is a mustahab act. Human beings have sexual desires which is perfectly natural and they can fulfill them through mut'a. People especially youth are going to have sex either way, it might as well be the halal way. You can pretend it doesn't happen but this is the reality.

The issue of adding the third testimony requires a lot of research and analysis, and as of yet I have not seen any clear cut reliable hadith that makes it permissible. The only daleel we have is the maraji's opinion on it, in which they say it is permissible without the intention of being a wajib act. It would be nice if our maraji' today talked about this issue more and explain to us laymen why they allow it despite our ahadith and classical scholars being against it.

No this isnt the first time the story is twisted with resolutions..
The US draft was designed to fail and thus “justify” unauthorized action in Syria, Russia’s UN envoy said. “If you made a decision to carry out an illegal military endeavour, we hope that you will come to your senses. You will be responsible for it yourselves,” Russia’s envoy to the UN, Vassily Nebenzia, warned.
Russia then proposed another resolution, based on an earlier draft by Sweden, which voices support for the new OPCW probe into the Douma incident. The UNSC meeting was suspended for consultations, on Sweden's request, before putting the resolution to vote.
Nebenzia said the US resolution, despite Washington claiming to take Moscow’s concerns into consideration, was effectively an attempt to resurrect the deprecated Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM). Even if the US project was adopted, it would take months to implement, the diplomat said, adding that the draft was a “provocative step” that had “nothing to do with the desire to investigate the Douma incident.” He said it was obviously designed to fail in order to serve as a justification for unauthorized military action against Syria.
“Why do you need the attribution mechanism, if you’ve already named the perpetrators before any investigation?”Nebenzia said, referring to blatant accusations against Damascus coming from the US and its allies
im looking for the draft the US proposed but I cant find it... im sure its ridiculous..

Had this chicken kebab salad at this street stall in Singapore recently. Only way you can tell the stall is halal is the hijabis outside. They can't display halal signs because they also sell alcohol. Singapore is a bit fundamentalist in that respect. Lol.

I don't think Assad launched the CW attack. It makes no sense for him to do it.
The possibilities include
1. The rebels staging the attack to force US and UN involvement in Syria
2. Israel engineering the attack in an effort to get the US to remove Assad
3. Putin ordering the attack through his proxies to force a US response in order to convince countries in the region that they need "Russian Protection"

With the new site layout, stuff that doesn't come up to the top of the list on its own at the right time gets missed. I had roasted potatoes and broccoli for supper. It was even better than I expected. Roasted broccoli is delicious. I'm going to make myself a cup of coffee with milk in a few minutes.
Also, I've lost a few pounds on my diet.

In reference to the OP, the reason this kind of hogwash is broadcasted is so the perpetrators can indulge in justifying their "liberation fantasies" and the "right side of history" and "democracy comes out the barrel of a gun", and "democracy falls from heaven like a bomb" or "comes in like a missile".
So other than how they will be seen in the media and in history books few people will read, nobody else really cares ---except their victims.

Salaam brother,
From a pure Islamic perspective, offensive wars are not permitted. Expansionism is not permitted for the sake of land grabbing. The battles fought during the time of the Prophet were either to defend Muslims or their properties.
Absolutely not. The conquests were the worst thing they did. It was the result of these conquests that Islam became associated with barbarism.
Furthermore, Imam Ali (as) didn't give bayah. He agreed to rescind his claim to the caliphate but that is not the same as giving bayah.
Lastly, Islam preaches "live and let live" not conquer or be conquered.

When I say Pakistan, I am taking about common people of Pakistan not their corrupt government.
Is Pakistan using kashmir to settle scores with India?? YES it is, One has to be naive to deny that, every country has hegemonic goals so does Pakistan. You are just blaming Pakistan & Kashmiris to wash away all the heinous crimes India has committed in kashmir. Pakistan is using Kashmiris as a tool but who is giving them the ammunition to do so ??
It weren't Pakistani troops who raped, killed & blinded thousands of Kashmiris.
It wasn't Pakistani army chief who rewarded a war criminal. If India would have treated kashmir's as their own it would have held its armed forces accountable.
India promised what ??? A plebiscite after the withdrawal of Pakistani forces??
India has long maintained that Kashmir is an internal issue. So what is India promising at UN. Please substantiate your calim.

Shame on Pakistan that backstabbed Kashmir and its people. It is Pakistan because of which Plebiscite couldn't happen. I can't support Munafiq establishment simply because it is so called muslim country.

Salaam brother, I guess one problem with my line of thought may be that I'm trying to know what I don't know. After all, Allah knows everything in the heavens and the earth and Allah knows the secrets of every individual's heart.
The philosopher Frithjof Schuon says:
“It is impossible to describe a landscape so validly as to exclude all other descriptions, for no one can see the landscape in all its aspects at the same time, and no single view can prevent the existence and validity of other equally possible views”
Therefore we cannot see the full truth of any matter, only Allah can. However I still think its important to have empathy and I think Empathy is much more important than sympathy. Furthermore, I think a very important point was raised in this thread that as well as evil there is also mercy everywhere. Come to think of it, I've met people who grew up in desrtuctive environments and have had completely different reactions. For example, I knew this guy from Afghanistan and he used to tell me about his rough childhood and stories about being ambushed by the Taliban. When this particular individual came to england he started to get involved in crime such as drug dealing and robbing people and one day I said to him "why are you robbing people, don't you care about Islam?" He replied "Im going to Hell anyway, so there's no hope".
ON THE FLIP SIDE...
I also met this women who was a refugee from Syria and she also had a hard life, but she was very thankful to Allah that she was bought into safety. She said to me "My God is the god of mercy" and he said to me that she abstains from sinning only because she loves Allah and not because she fears punishment.
So I guess different hearts react to their environments in different ways. Those whom Allah chooses to guide cannot be misguided.
Alhamdulillah I recently read about Imam Zain Ul Abedeen (RA) who witnessed the massacre of Karabla and who witnessed his father Imam Hussain (RA) being killed. He had a hard life but he reacted to this with more compassion and love. He used to give so much to the poor and feed the hungry and he done so much for Islam and spreading knowledge through the globe. Subhanallah.